David Patrick Caracos (Promo Speaker)

And that Diddy promised him, oh, I'm going to get you to become a big star in the music industry, from what I was reading. These lawsuits, they're very, very old from when they occurred. They don't have specific dates. The women, the two women who are suing Diddy that just came out today, they are saying that they worked for him for a period of time. So they were employees.

And that Diddy promised him, oh, I'm going to get you to become a big star in the music industry, from what I was reading. These lawsuits, they're very, very old from when they occurred. They don't have specific dates. The women, the two women who are suing Diddy that just came out today, they are saying that they worked for him for a period of time. So they were employees.

These things all happened so long ago that it really just it makes you pause for a second to say, why are you doing this now? Why not then? And even let's just say they were afraid of retribution from Diddy. OK, I can understand that. But why are you now doing it as a trial or for Diddy is getting closer and closer? And the criminal case has already seen a lot of a lot of lawsuits.

These things all happened so long ago that it really just it makes you pause for a second to say, why are you doing this now? Why not then? And even let's just say they were afraid of retribution from Diddy. OK, I can understand that. But why are you now doing it as a trial or for Diddy is getting closer and closer? And the criminal case has already seen a lot of a lot of lawsuits.

It gives me pause. Are they doing this for notoriety, publicity, money? All three, potentially. Or, you know, is this true? I can't be the judge of that. I don't know all the facts and everything like that. But it's just very, very weird to me and suspect, if you will, that you got these people filing lawsuits from 20 years ago.

It gives me pause. Are they doing this for notoriety, publicity, money? All three, potentially. Or, you know, is this true? I can't be the judge of that. I don't know all the facts and everything like that. But it's just very, very weird to me and suspect, if you will, that you got these people filing lawsuits from 20 years ago.

Now, all of these lawsuits follow that same pattern that they allege that they were given a drink, drugged, and woke up to being assaulted by Diddy or his associates. And I was wondering how that plays into all the other cases, the fact that it seems like it's setting up this pattern of behavior.

Now, all of these lawsuits follow that same pattern that they allege that they were given a drink, drugged, and woke up to being assaulted by Diddy or his associates. And I was wondering how that plays into all the other cases, the fact that it seems like it's setting up this pattern of behavior.

Yeah, you're right. Definitely a common denominator, almost, that it's alleged that Diddy drugs them, spikes their drinks with something. Then, you know, for the males, it seems like he's giving them Viagra. For the females, he's giving them other drugs to keep them up. And they also talk about the freak-offs, how they're occurring for multiple days at a time.

Yeah, you're right. Definitely a common denominator, almost, that it's alleged that Diddy drugs them, spikes their drinks with something. Then, you know, for the males, it seems like he's giving them Viagra. For the females, he's giving them other drugs to keep them up. And they also talk about the freak-offs, how they're occurring for multiple days at a time.

It does sound like there is a pattern. You're 100% correct. Now, think about it, though. If I'm the opposing counsel, if I'm Diddy's counsel, you and all these individuals are filing lawsuits after the original lawsuits have been filed. Well, my argument is they have all read the lawsuits. So now you're just piggybacking off of this. How can you tell if this is real or not?

It does sound like there is a pattern. You're 100% correct. Now, think about it, though. If I'm the opposing counsel, if I'm Diddy's counsel, you and all these individuals are filing lawsuits after the original lawsuits have been filed. Well, my argument is they have all read the lawsuits. So now you're just piggybacking off of this. How can you tell if this is real or not?

That would be my argument, at least, because these new lawsuits, they all have read the And they all are up to date on the status quo, I guess, for Diddy. So that's why I'm very, very hesitant. But I don't know if that will even come in in the criminal trial whenever that happens, if it does happen.

That would be my argument, at least, because these new lawsuits, they all have read the And they all are up to date on the status quo, I guess, for Diddy. So that's why I'm very, very hesitant. But I don't know if that will even come in in the criminal trial whenever that happens, if it does happen.

Because there are certain things that may be allowed to come in, certain things that may not be able to come in. That's all the discovery and the motions that will be litigated by the teams.

Because there are certain things that may be allowed to come in, certain things that may not be able to come in. That's all the discovery and the motions that will be litigated by the teams.

I think it's a strong possibility. I'm not saying every one of them, because I don't know if some of these individuals are actual witnesses in the state's case against Diddy. Nobody knows because they all say Jane Doe and John Doe. So I have no idea. But I would venture to guess that the judge will probably not allow most of this evidence to come in.

I think it's a strong possibility. I'm not saying every one of them, because I don't know if some of these individuals are actual witnesses in the state's case against Diddy. Nobody knows because they all say Jane Doe and John Doe. So I have no idea. But I would venture to guess that the judge will probably not allow most of this evidence to come in.

Although they already have enough evidence, it sounds like today.

Although they already have enough evidence, it sounds like today.